EIPS Minutes 5/20/99

Attendees:

Travis Tyson: Micron PC
Paul Russell: HP
Perry Biancavilla: HP
Kevin Howard: HP
John Clarke: VTU
John Morris: IBM
John Hayward: Republic
Bob Sanders: IBM

Minutes:

1. ACTION ITEM 1 from APRIL MEETING: Bob Sanders reviewed the initial survey results. To date I only have input from Liebert, AMP, Intel, Compaq, IBM, and four HP locations. All EIPS members were to have their input received by 5/12/99. I therefore ask you again to please take a few moments and do this. The results are being collected in a spreadsheet which can be used as the survey input vehicle if you prefer. I will send that to Paul Russell to post on the website. Simply download the spreadsheet, fill in a column for your company, rename the file and e-mail it to me at btsander@us.ibm.com or print and fax it to 919-543-4253.
ACTIONS: 1. Bob Sanders update spreadsheet and send to Paul. 2. Paul post it on the site and do away with the present survey form. 3. All EIPS members either submit their surveys or if they have already submitted one, check the accuracy and completeness of what is already recorded for your company/location. Some of the responses were incomplete. If you're doing what we intended it shouldn't take more than an hour to provide your "best guess".

Discussion:

a. Membership: A few contacts established at some distributors in the US and Europe. None have joined the calls yet however. Retailers have not shown an interest in participating to this point.

b. Desired pallet weight of 35 lbs. (16kg) conflicts with desire for a high quality reusable pool type pallet. Some Chep pallets exceed 70 lbs.. The Canadian CPC pallet actually exceeds 100 lbs. The Grocery Industry had 19 items on their wish list including a 50 lbs. maximum weight which they have not yet achieved. There will be some trade-offs.

c. Pool Systems: The survey favored development of a reusable system vs. one-way exclusively. Most favor a program managed by a third party such as Chep or similar.

d. Slipsheets: Considerable discussion followed that perhaps pallets are being misused today as a shipping platform vs. their original intended purpose which was for local handling convenience. The slipsheet approach takes this approach and improves on it since it accomplishes the best of both worlds. That is, it can be mechanically handled but doesn't take up weight or space
during transportation. An approach whereby all shipment is done on slipsheets and only onsite handling done on a pallet of your choice is compelling. The downside is getting everyone in the pipeline to invest in the equipment (about $7300/device) and also how to handle these loads deeper into the pipeline where lift equipment doesn't exist. Apple pioneered this approach but hasn't succeeded in getting the whole industry to follow suit. Perhaps, as with the Mac they were simply ahead of their time. Home Depot also tried to force this upon its suppliers with no success. The beauty of this scenario is that it allows you to place these loads on pallets if needed. Air cookie sheets can be modified to handle these with false bottoms or inverted styles which do not have the depressed well. Companies unwilling to invest in the equipment would be obligated to provide pallets themselves. 7 common carriers will accept slipsheets now. Further exploration of his approach is recommended but only after completing our initial task which is to improve upon the design and construction of pallets that are used.

e. Outlook for current project: It is apparent that a single size or style is unlikely to prevail considering everything. Our goal should be to arrive at the 2 or 3 sizes and styles which are preferred and ensure good construction and quality of these. Furthermore, for custom pallets to match at least the style and construction quality requirements, minimum access dimensions and so on.
At this time the most likely winners appear to be 1200x1000 and 1200x800 due to current usage rates and perhaps 44x40 based on initial space efficiency ratings on multiple transportation modes. Four way block style is also gaining favor although survey input is far from complete.

2. ACTION ITEM 2 FROM APRIL MEETING: John Clarke reviewed the specs received at this point which came from IBM, AMP, and Liebert. Intel's file could not be opened.

48x40 or 40x48: 4
1200x1000 or 1000x1200: 3
800x1200: 2
48x42 or 1219 x 1067: 2
1 each of the following: 48x45, 42x44, 48x32, 42x42, 40x24, 1000x600, 36x47.25, 28x24, 39.5x41.5, 58.5x54, 61.5x41.5

ACTION: All EIPS members fax or e-mail your current pallet specs to John Clarke for analysis. This item is now 2 months overdue!


3. ACTION ITEM 3 FROM APRIL MEETING:

a. Ocean Container Sizes: John Hayward was prepared to present his portion but I neglected to let him address that first and he had to leave. Sorry John!

b. Aircraft Sizes: Ron Johnson reported late that he would not be able to attend but that he was close to completing his portion.

c. Surface Europe: Erich Guenter (IBM) was unable to join. Reason unknown. Bob Sanders will follow up with him.

d. Surface USA: John Bridges did not call in. I did get an error message on my e-mail reminder. I'll try a different address this time.

ACTIONS: E-mail your assessments to Bob Sanders and to Paul Russell to add to the knowledge base and then be prepared to discuss it next time.


Attached below is the spreadsheet you can use to input your survey response. Simply download the sheet and rename it as eips survey yourcompany.xls or 123 whichever format you prefer then delete all input columns aside from your own. I will then paste your response into the master file.

(See attached file: eips survey responses.123)(See attached file: eips survey responses.XLS)

4. Next Meeting: June 17, 1999. 11am eastern time US, Dial 212-547-0189, 99789#


Regards,


Bob Sanders
IBM Corporation
WDOS, Dept. VQZ, Bldg. 002-3, Office MM302 RTP, North Carolina, USA, 27709-2195 Phone: 919-543-1260, Fax: 919-543-4253 email: btsander@us.ibm.com